In Defense of the Online Church

A priori argumentation assumes definitions and therefore can be somewhat dissatisfying. Certain presuppositions anchor the propositions and if interpreted in the manner they are presented become a compelling foundation but if interpreted differently from the intention of the arguer create a dissonance that destroys the entire framework of the argument. In short, if I didn't believe it, to begin with, it'll hardly convince me to believe it after the fact.

I, not unlike many of you I'm sure, have read a litany of articles both short and long, weighty and light, humorous and stern, from the young and the old, from the conservative to the perhaps less so on the weaknesses and difficulties of doing church in an online format. I italicize because I feel no matter how strongly these well-meaning authors distance themselves from that concept, they ultimately fall prey to the underlying implications. At the end of reading each one, I am left with that a priori taste in my mouth. A fundamental proposition to everyone's argument is "gathering cannot be done virtually" and then they proceed to show that the church must gather. That being a local church is being a local gathering. That oversight of the Elders must be in person. That the sacraments are inherently physical and must meet certain parameters to be legitimate, including personal presence. All of which are compelling arguments if "gathering cannot be done virtually."

I finish these articles and immediately feel the urge to call the author and ask, "why?" Their explanations in the articles themselves range from "there's something missing" to "of course we know it's not the same" which serves perfectly well for convincing someone who already agrees with them. Hardly airtight logic or Theological proof. More personal conversations typically end up with me being kindly referred to as a "semantic" and the same general "feeling" of something missing, something unachievable in a virtual setting, being the shifting sand of a foundation for the argument. Thinking about it has finally burst into writing, so I present my defense of the Online Church.

What is gathering? Mirriam-Webster defines it by linking to two other words: Assembly and Meeting. Assembly uses gathering in its definition so that's not necessarily that helpful but its "a company of persons gathered for deliberation and legislation, worship, or entertainment." In this definition, common intent is the key to an assembly. Meeting adds an element: "an act or process of coming together." So that implies movement from not together to together. In both of these cases, physical presence is not specified. A virtual gathering can be both intentional and moves from not together (video call not connected) to together. A common proof text is Hebrews 10:25 (ESV) "not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near." I'm no Greek scholar but I can look things up with the best of them, that is ἐπισυναγωγὴν and is translated "assembly" by the KJV and other times "assembling together" and according to Bible Hub has an implication of a complete group. Again, maybe physically is assumed but an ancient near-eastern thinker wouldn't even be able to conceive of a virtual gathering so the absence of an insistence on physical presence is not evidence for either concept. 

Commands to the church in Scripture are given to individual groups with the ultimate result of being instructional, binding, edifying, and directed towards the rest of the Body in the Universal sense. I in no way deny the logistical and Theological importance of the local assembly. Each autonomous unit is a relationship-center of believers who worship, serve, and minister through the structure and agency of the local body. So, what does attending church physically provide that attending it virtually does not? I'd contend nothing of spiritual importance. It can provide a sense of separation from the day-to-day which could enhance the ability of a worshipper to "get in the frame of mind" to worship. Which is all well and good, as long as we don't lose the fact that we should be always be worshipping! We fall into the trap of compartmentalizing our lives and then when circumstances mash our neatly sorted divisions together we get out of sorts. Maybe this is just the kickstart the American church needs to remember our responsibilities as worshippers don't begin and end on Sundays?

What about the ordinances? Can someone be Baptized virtually? It would certainly be odd. Picture it, the Pastor on one screen, the convert on another, the Pastor recites his favorite Baptismal passage as the convert submerges in his bathtub. Not a particularly convenient or effective ceremony, but is it wrong? If the convert is following Christ's example, the process is observed in as public a setting as a local church assembly (not that public really), and its purpose is to identify with Christ and join the local membership I see no reason it could not be called a Baptism. It is reasonable to argue that the individual cannot Baptize himself, but is it really the being physically submerged into the water that makes it Baptism? Immersion is by definition submersion, I don't suggest the modality isn't important but it derives its importance from its meaning - not its meaning from its form. Hence in extreme circumstances, full immersion may not be entirely necessary while preserving the intent and message of the act of obedience. As such, in an extreme circumstance that prevents physical presence, Baptism is not such a rigid physical ritual to be impossible.

How about the Lord's Supper? Can the Eucharist be observed virtually? This, to me, is much easier to answer. Of course, it can. Generally, I'd say the Lord's Supper is designed to represent the unity of the body both in the identification as recipients of Christ's atoning sacrifice and in the longing for His imminent coming and the Marriage Feast celebration. What about physically being in a room changes the experience of the Lord's Supper? Are the nursery workers no longer members of the Body? If it is a physical manifestation of grace and the elements must be blessed by the ordained clergy and each member must take a piece of the same loaf and a sip from the same cup to physically receive a spiritual blessing than sure, can't be done virtually. St. Bernard's can't hold Mass virtually, or at least shouldn't by their own rules. But the benefits of The Lord's Supper are not given to me by the elements or the Pastors or the holding hands and singing Blessed Be the Tie That Binds. All of those things are physical representations of spiritual benefits, representations that can be replicated in a virtual setting.

Is physical church attendance preferable? Certainly! I enjoy physical presence more than virtual presence. I am less distracted and forced to prepare physically and mentally to a higher degree to be in another person's presence. However, with time and adjustment, if the current way of life continues or gets worse this will change. We will grow more comfortable in the virtual space and the negatives will fade. Ultimately, the outcry against virtual church smacks of sacramentalism and closes off local churches from a modality of ministry that could be explored. Perhaps the best thing that could come of this difficult time would be an expansion of The Church's presence in the online world. We live in the digital age and the Church is called to minister to people where they are.

The Saxcademy: Best Picture - Three Decades

The "Saxcademy" is a group of film-enjoyers who happen to share the same last name. I thought it might be interesting to look at the "best" film across the past 3 decades (since 1990) but with a twist. Instead of stuffy, "Oscar-bait" type films dominating the nominations, 6 films across all genres were chosen as nominees and presented to the members of the Saxcademy. They were asked to rank each film in a grid from 1st to 6th with the option of writing in another film and indicating where it would finish. They were able to give multiple films votes at the same tier (so two 1st place films etc) and could also put a movie in multiple tiers although nobody did that. I then compiled the results and used the following formula to determine a winner.

1st Place - 6pts
2nd Place - 4pts
3rd Place -  3pts
2nd Place - 2pts
4th, 5th, and No Vote - 1 pt

So, here are the Saxcademy's Best Picture selections.

1990

In a close race, the first year was determined by a single point.

The Hunt for Red October

John McTiernan's adaptation of Tom Clancy's novel by the same name starring Alec Baldwin, Sean Connery, Sam Neill, and James Earl Jones received 2 1st place votes and 2 2nd place votes.

Martin Scorsese's gangster epic Goodfellas received 3 1st place votes but no other votes leaving it one point short.

The other nominees ended up in this order: Arachnophobia; The Godfather, Part III; Home Alone; Days of Thunder; and write-in King of New York.

1991

3 films received 1st place votes but the leader was clear in '91.

What About Bob?

The delightful Bill Murray/Richard Dreyfuss comedy from director Frank Oz got 2 1sts and 3 2nds.

James Cameron's Terminator 2: Judgment Day received 2 1sts, 2 3rds, and 1 5th finishing second while the thrilling Silence of the Lambs finished 3rd with a 1st, 2 2nds, and a 3rd.

The remaining films lined up like this: Beauty and the Beast; Hook; Point Break; and write-in Cape Fear.

1992

Another tight contest in '92 saw 4 films receive a 1st place vote.

Reservoir Dogs

Tarantino's debut crime film edged out Aladdin by a single point. Dogs had 2 1sts, 1 2nd, and a 4th. Aladdin had a 1st, 2 2nds, and a 3rd.

The Last of the Mohicans got a 1st, a 2nd, a 3rd, and 2 4ths putting it tied for 3rd with The Muppet Christmas Carol which had a 1st, a 2nd, 2 3rds and a 5th. A Few Good Men, Glengarry Glen Ross, and write-in Malcolm X rounded off the list.

1993

Again 4 films got a 1st place vote in '93 but the winner was more clear.

Jurassic Park

Spielberg's epic Crichton adaptation dominated with 3 1sts and 2 3rds.

The Harrison Ford thriller The Fugitive was next with a 1st, 3 2nds, and a 5th. The Civil War epic Gettysburg with a 1st, 2 3rds, and 2 4ths tied it with Spielberg's Holocaust tale Schindler's List which received a 1st, a 2nd, a 3rd, and a 4th. The rest were Tombstone; The Nightmare Before Christmas, and write-in Groundhog Day.

1994

Tarantino was back on top in '94.

Pulp Fiction

3 1sts and a 2nd gave the masterpiece an easy victory.

The Lion King also got 2 1sts, a 4th, and a 5th. The rest were The Shawshank Redemption; Forrest Gump; Dumb and Dumber; write-in The Santa Clause; and Quiz Show.

1995

3 films got 1st place votes in '95.

Apollo 13

3 1sts and 2 3rds gave the Tom Hanks-led biopic the win. Michael Mann's crime thriller Heat got 2 1sts and a 2nd and the Richard Dreyfuss drama Mr. Holland's Opus got a 1st, 3 3rds, and a 5th. The rest were Toy Story; Braveheart; Crimson Tide; and the write-in Se7en.

1996

A tight 2-horse race came down to 3 points in '96.

Mission: Impossible

De Palma's franchise launcher got 3 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd to barely edge out the Sci-Fi thriller Independence Day and its 2 1sts, a 2nd, and 2 3rds.

The rest were The Ghost and the Darkness; Fargo; the write-in Jerry Maguire; James and the Giant Peach; and The Rock.

1997

Good Will Hunting

3 1sts and a 2nd gave the Robin Williams/Matt Damon drama the win. Alien action-comedy Men In Black got 2 1sts and 2nds. The remaining films ended up like this: Air Force One; Jackie Brown; write-in Con Air; L.A. Confidential; and Gattaca.

1998

'98 was the first year with a unanimous decision.

Saving Private Ryan

5 1st place votes slam-dunked the Spielberg-Hanks War epic. Second place was also unanimous going to Jim Carrey's dramedy The Truman Show.

The rest were A Bug's Life; The Big Lebowski; Rushmore; write-in Mulan; and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

1999

The Matrix

The Sixth Sense received 2 1sts, 2 2nds, and a 4th but that fell short of The Matrix's 3 1sts and 2 2nds.

The rest were Star Wars: Episode 1 - The Phantom Menace; Magnolia; The Mummy; Fight Club; and write-in The Insider.

2000

Another unanimous victory in '00.

Gladiator

5 1sts for Ridley Scott's actual Best Picture Oscar winner.

The rest were Remember the Titans; The Patriot; Memento; O Brother, Where Art Thou?; and The Emperor's New Groove.

2001

Strong finishes from the Peter Jackson trilogy highlight the next three years.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

4 1sts and a 2nd gave the first Tolkein adaptation the win over A Beautiful Mind which got a 1st, 2 2nds, and a 5th.

The rest were Ocean's Eleven; Training Day; Enemy at the Gates; Black Hawk Down; and write-in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.

2002

The ability to award multiple films the same tier created an interesting situation in '02. 4 films received 1st place votes but the winner was unanimously given 5 1sts.

Signs

I've written at length about how much I love Signs so I appreciated the respect it received from the Saxcademy. The other 1st place vote-getters were The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers with a 1st, 2 2nds, a 3rd, and a 4th; The Bourne Identity with a 1st, a 2nd, a 3rd, and a 4th; and We Were Soldiers with a 1st, a 2nd, a 3rd, a 4th, and a 5th.

Minority Report; Gangs of New York; and write-in Ice Age wrapped up the list.

2003

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

The trilogy got 2 Best Pictures and a 2nd place finish in 3 years. A much better reflection of reality here with the Saxcademy than with that Oscar crowd. Master and Commander of the Far Side of the World got a 1st, 2 3rds, and a 4th but only managed to finish third behind The Last Samurai with 2 2nds and 3 3rds.

The rest were Elf; write-in Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl; Kill Bill. Vol 1; and Mystic River.

2004

'04 has the first write-in 1st place vote.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

The third Potter film got 3 1sts, a 2nd, and a 5th. The gave it a comfortable win over second-place finisher Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind with 1 1st and 2 3rds. Write-in Spider-Man 2 got a 1st place vote which put it fifth overall.

The others were Napoleon Dynamite; National Treasure; Miracle; and Man on Fire.

2005

Batman Begins

Christopher Nolan's reboot got 4 1st and a 2nd to give it a clear win over Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and its 1 1st, 2 3rds, and a 4th.

The rest lined up The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe; War of the Worlds; write-in Hoodwinked; Munich; and Good Night, and Good Luck.

2006

Nolan went back to back in '06.

The Prestige

3 1sts and 2 2nds gave the Bale/Jackman magician mystery the win over Scorsese's The Departed and its 2 1sts, 1 2nd, and 2 3rds. Stranger Than Fiction also got a 1st, a 2nd, and a 4th.

The rest were Amazing Grace; Pan's Labyrinth; Children of Men; and write-in Inside Man.

2007

3 films got 1st place votes in 2007 but the winner was clear once again.

No Country for Old Men

The Coens Brother's western got 4 1sts and a 3rd. Will Smith's Zombie thriller I Am Legend got a 1st, a 2nd, and 3 4ths and Paul Thomas Anderson's Updike adaptation There Will Be Blood got a 1st, a 3rd, and a 5th.

The rest were 3:10 to Yuma; Zodiac; Juno; and write-in Hot Rod.

2008

Nolan took a year off but was back on top in '08.

The Dark Knight

The sequel was unanimously on top.

The rest of the year listed as follows: Kung Fu Panda; Taken; The Hurt Locker; Burn After Reading; write-in Wall-E, and The Brothers Bloom.

2009

Inglourious Basterds

Tarantino's WWII piece got 4 1st place and 1 4th. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince got a 1st, 2 2nds, a 3rd, and a 5th.

Sherlock Holmes; Star Trek; Avatar; write-in Zombieland; and The Men Who Stare at Goats were the rest.

2010

4 of 6 to Nolan. Quite a run.

Inception

4 1sts and a 2nd solidified a dominant win for the time-bending mind heist. The King's Speech got a 1st, a 2nd, a 4th, and a 6th.

The rest were Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1; Despicable Me; write-in Megamind; Shutter Island; The Social Network.

Megamind was a big oversight for the nomination committee.

2011

The next two were much closer races.

Moneyball

3 1sts and 2 2nds gave the Michael Lewis adaptation the edge over Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2's 2 1sts, 1 2nd, 1 3rd, and 1 5th.

The rest were Drive; write-in Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows; The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy; and The Ides of March.

2012

Even closer was '12 which saw 4 films get a 1st place vote.

Lincoln

Spielberg's epic got 2 1sts, a 2nd, and 2 3rds. That barely beat Argo and its 1 1st, 2 2nds, and 2 4ths; Django Unchained's 1 1st, 2 2nds, and 1 5th and the second write-in 1st place vote for Dark Knight Rises.

The others were Zero Dark Thirty; The Place Beyond the Pines; and Life of Pi.

2013

No question in '13 with another unanimous winner.

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

The rest fell in this order: World War Z; Inside Llewyn Davis; Gravity; Snowpiercer; write-in 12 Years a Slave; and 42.

2014

Nolan again! Truly a Saxcademy favorite.

Interstellar

3 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd set it clearly above the others. John Wick and its 1st, 2 3rds, and a 4th and another write-in 1st to Guardians of the Galaxy were next.

The rest were The Lego Movie; Love & Mercy; Nightcrawler; and Whiplash.

2015

The narrowest of margins determined the winner in '15 as it was the first single-point victory since 1990.

Spotlight

2 1sts and 2 2nds gave the journalism expose the single point it needed to beat Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens and its 2 1sts, 1 2nd, 1 3rd, and 1 5th.


The Big Short also got a 1st, 2 2nds, a 4th, and a 5th. The rest were The Martian; The Revenant; write-in Inside Out; and Mad Max: Fury Road.

2016

While Star Wars was on the losing end of a 1 point matchup in '15 it ended up on top in '16.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

1 1st and 3 2nds made the spin-off the first winner to not actually get the most 1st place votes since the first year, 1990. Scorsese ended up in second again (a bit of a theme perhaps?) as Silence got 2 1sts, a 3rd, and a 4th.

Arrival also got a 1st, a 2nd, and 2 4ths to finish third and Hell or High Water took fourth with 1 1st, 2 3rds, and a 5th.

The rest were write-in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them; Deadpool; and Hidden Figures.

2017

It seems like its been a while since Nolan won (2 years) but he's back.

Dunkirk

The film Tarantino called the 2nd best of the decade got 3 1sts and 2 2nds. It won easily over Get Out's 1 1st and 2 2nds and Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi's 1 1st, 1 2nd, 1 3rd, and 1 4th.

The others were mother!; Logan; write-in Blade Runner 2049; and The Death of Stalin.

2018

A tie sat at the top of '18 but in cases of a tie the film with the most 1st place votes gets the win.

Avengers: Infinity War

The only Avengers film to get a Saxcademy Best Picture (Saxcar?) award (spoilers), Infinity War got 2 1sts and 2 4ths. That tied Spike Lee's BlacKkKlansman in total score, but it only got 1 1st, along with 2 2nds, and a 4th.

A Star is Born also got a 1st, 2 2nds, and a 6th and The Ballad of Buster Scruggs got a 1st and a 3rd.

The rest were Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse; Vice; and write-in Annihilation.

2019

This past year the Saxcar made it back to Tarantino, his 4th in the 30 years.

Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood

3 1sts and a 4th set it above Joker and its 1 1st, 1 2nd, and 1 4th. Knives Out also got a 1st, a 3rd, and a 5th but finished fourth behind The Irishman's 3 2nds and 1 5th.

The others were The King; Ford v Ferrari; and write-in Avengers: Endgame.



So, the winners were:

1990 - The Hunt for Red October
1991 - What About Bob?
1992 - Reservoir Dogs
1993 - Jurassic Park
1994 - Pulp Fiction
1995 - Apollo 13
1996 - Mission: Impossible
1997 - Good Will Hunting
1998 - Saving Private Ryan
1999 - The Matrix
2000 - Gladiator
2001 - The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
2002 - Signs
2003 - The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
2004 - Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
2005 - Batman Begins
2006 - The Prestige
2007 - No Country for Old Men
2008 - The Dark Knight
2009 - Inglourious Basterds
2010 - Inception
2011 - Moneyball
2012 - Lincoln
2013 - The Secret Life of Walter Mitty
2014 - Interstellar
2015 - Spotlight
2016 - Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
2017 - Dunkirk
2018 - Avengers: Infinity War
2019 - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

Let us know where we were wrong.

What Makes a Good Movie - a Cinematic Prolegomena

            For the next year, as a goal or personal project, if you will, I’ve decided to write reviews for 52 films. A film a week. I’ve written a few film reviews but nothing consistent so I think it’ll be a fun challenge and hopefully improve my writing on cinema and in general. I’ll try to maintain the variety I’m accustomed to in my current cinematic diet and that in turn should force me to wrestle with a diverse set of genres, eras, and voices. 

Before evaluating whether or not a particular film is “good” or “effective” or “compelling” or whatever other positive categorical description you prefer, I need to first make an attempt at defining the traits, attributes, pieces, and processes that compose the formula of the cinematic experience. You may consider this my cinematic prolegomena. 

Cast, Crew, Collaborators

One of the primary draws for me when considering whether or not to give a movie a try is the collection of individuals on the project. Generally, the number of names I recognize in the cast and crew correlates with my expectations. 

This does not mean I’m not excited to see up-and-coming actors or directing debuts, but my expectations will be tempered accordingly.

Setting, Sense of Place, Ambience, Environment, World

Stories can’t occur in a vacuum. Unless of course, they occur in space or inside the home appliance used to remove particulates from the carpet. Even in both of these remarkably different but suspiciously similar examples, the “where” for the story creates the means by which it is understood. A good film is in a recognizable place with consistency, clarity, and often a certain level of sophistication in its design. Details are better shown and not told, experienced not explained. With more familiarity, there’s more capacity for errors or inconsistencies to stick out. The more radical and bizarre the world, the more difficult it can be to understand.

A well-built world can cover a multitude of screenplay, character, and acting sins.

Writing, Screenplay, Dialogue

How the film communicates to the viewer is hands down the most important part of making a film. The best story in the world can’t overcome a clumsy telling. Effective writing is an elusive idea. I think it’s similar to effective painting. Individual brushstrokes and color choices can be analyzed and perfected but if the picture isn’t coherent, communicative, and meaningful all the technical skill in the world can’t save it. 

Characters, Acting

Great characters come in many different varieties. On the one hand, complete, deep, multi-dimensional characters resonate in the real world. On the other hand, caricatures are effective ways to form analogies, establish and deconstruct stereotypes, relate to literary archetypes, and feed the fantastical nature of many stories. Bad characters are flat in three-dimensional worlds; their motives and stimuli either incoherent or telegraphed.

Good acting is either such a magnificent transformation or emotional display it dominates the experience or its so subtle as to be ignored. I like both types of performers but admittedly will praise the former more than the latter. Bad acting is like rotten fruit, impossible to ignore and it ruins whatever it’s a part of. Elements like wild emotional swings, no emotion at all, and inconsistent characterizations will reduce my enjoyment.

Story, Plot

Something has to happen for me to enjoy a film. This, more than the other categories, can set me against films that have historically received critical backing. Not only does something need to happen but I have to care about that something, either in real life or as a result of the film providing a reason to believe, if you will. There are films which are beautifully made, well-acted and scripted, with plenty of thespian curb appeal that fail miserably to get me to care. The ultimate example of this is probably Speilberg’s War Horse. I just didn’t care enough to enjoy it. 

The story, or more accurately the plot, needs to have interior consistency. Plot holes are forgivable for a myriad of reasons ranging from perspective to time constraints but at the end of the day if the world doesn’t “make sense” I’m going to complain about it.

Technical Features, Soundtrack, Lighting, Sound, Editing, Mixing, Etc

I have no training or special knowledge about the technical aspects of film. I can appreciate a beautifully framed shot or a perfectly timed swell in the score but I’ll completely miss most of the nuanced bits and pieces of making a movie. Maybe someday I’ll pursue some technical training but for now, I’ll remain a blissfully-ignorant layman. That being said, obvious editing is distracting and annoying and I don’t like it.

Meaning, Moral, Philosophy, Zeitgeist, Theme

The center of all communication is the message. Film presents a unique way to transmit a message. When I consider a film’s theme, the criteria is two-fold. Did I understand the message? And, did I appreciate, resonate with, like the message? My favorite movie, Signs, earned its top spot for excellence in many categories but specifically unparalleled personal connection to me in its meaning. A good message communicated poorly is less enjoyable than a bad message picked up loud and clear.

So, in summary, a good film has a strong cast and crew, a clear sense of place, memorable dialogue, relatable characters, an interesting and coherent plot, technical skill, and a defined theme. I am looking forward to tackling this challenge and hope it will be interesting for any who decide to come along for the ride.

Franchise or Journeyman

What is a "franchise" Quarterback? You hear the term bandied about usually in reference to newly drafted college stars brimming with potential or established veterans with years of success but in neither case is the idea very well defined.

I propose the following definition.

A franchise Quarterback will have made 64 or more starts for an organization.

The rationale behind this definition is two-fold. First, it is achievable on a rookie deal but only if every single potential start is made. Secondly, it's a rarer benchmark than you might anticipate. Since 1967, every Franchise has had at least one but no team has had more than five.

For this post, I'll go through each Franchise, note their Franchise QBs, their near-misses, a few additional thoughts of interest, and conclude with a word about Journeymen. In alphabetical order by city for no other reason than it seems sensible to me. All stats current as of week 13, 2019.

Arizona Cardinals (aka. St. Louis Cardinals, Phoenix Cardinals)

Franchise QBs

1. Jim Hart - 179 starts ('67-'81, '83)
2. Neil Lomax - 101 starts ('81-'88)
3. Jake Plummer - 82 starts ('97-'02)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Kyler Murray, 13 starts

Near Misses

1. Carson Palmer - 62 ('13-'17)
2. Kurt Warner - 57 ('05-'09)

 44 total QBs with at least one start.


Atlanta Falcons

Franchise QBs

1. Matt Ryan - 186 ('08-now)
2. Steve Bartowski - 121 ('75-'85)
3. Chris Chandler - 67 ('97-'01)
4. Michael Vick - 67 ('01-'06)
5. Chris Miller - 66 ('87-'93)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Matt Ryan

Near Misses

1. Bob Berry - 51 ('68-'72)

37 total QBs


Baltimore Ravens (Not Colts)

Franchise QBs

1. Joe Flacco - 163 ('08-'18)

Champion QBs - Joe Flacco 2013, Trent Dilfer 2001

Current QB - Lamar Jackson, 21 starts

Near Misses

1. Kyle Boller - 42 ('03-'05, '07)

 20 total QBs


Buffalo Bills

Franchise QBs

1. Joe Ferguson - 164 ('73-'84)
2. Jim Kelly - 160 ('86-'96)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Josh Allen, 24 starts

Near Misses

1. Ryan Fitzpatrick - 63 ('09-'12)
2. Drew Bledsoe - 48 ('02-'04)
3. Tyrod Taylor - 44 ('05-'17)

37 total QBs


Carolina Panthers

Franchise QBs

1. Cam Newton - 124 ('11-now)
2. Jake Delhomme - 90 ('03-'09)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Kyle Allen, 12 starts (Cam Newton is injured)

Near Misses

1. Steve Beuerlein - 51 ('96-'00)

 17 total QBs. If you're looking for Kerry Collins, he ended up with 38 and I set the Near Miss boundary to 40.


Chicago Bears

Franchise QBs

1. Jay Cutler - 102 ('09-'16)
2. Jim McMahon - 84 ('82-'88)
3. Jim Harbaugh - 65 ('88-'93)

Champion QBs - Jim McMahon 1986

Current QB - Mitch Trubisky, 38 starts

Near Misses

1. Bobby Douglass - 52 ('68-'75)
2. Bob Avellini - 50 ('75-'79, '82, '84)
3. Erik Kramer - 46 ('94-'98)

49 total QBs


Cincinnati Bengals

Franchise QBs

1. Ken Anderson - 172 ('71-'85)
2. Andy Dalton - 130 ('11-'19)
3. Boomer Esiason - 124 ('84-'92, '97)
4. Jeff Blake - 66 ('94-'99)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Andy Dalton

Near Misses

1. Jon Kitna - 46 ('01-'04)

 30 total QBs


Cleveland Browns

Franchise QBs

1. Brian Sipe - 114 ('74-'83)
2. Bernie Kosar - 106 ('85-'93)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Baker Mayfield, 26 starts

Near Misses

1. Tim Couch - 59 ('99-'03)
2.  Bill Nelson - 51 ('68-'72)
3. Mike Phipps - 51 ('70-'76)

 50 total QBs (28 since 2000)


Dallas Cowboys

Franchise QBs

1. Troy Aikman - 165 ('89-'00)
2. Tony Romo - 127 ('06'-'15)
3. Roger Staubach - 114 ('69-'71, '73-'79)
4. Danny White - 92 ('78, '80-'87)

Champion QBs - Roger Staubauch 1972 & 1978, Troy Aikman 1993, 1994, & 1996

Current QB - Dak Prescott, 61 starts

Near Misses

1. Dak Prescott ('16-'19)
2. Craig Morton - 48 ('67-'72)

36 total QBs


Denver Broncos

Franchise QBs

1. John Elway - 231 ('83-'98)
2. Craig Morton - 64 ('77-'82)

Champion QBs - John Elway 1998 & 1999, Peyton Manning 2016

Current QB - Drew Lock, 2 starts (Joe Flacco is injured)

Near Misses

1. Peyton Manning - 57 ('12-'15)
2. Jake Plummer - 54 ('03-'06)
3. Brian Griese - 51 ('99-'02)
4. Charley Johnson - 41 ('72-'75)

 42 total QBs, including Tim Tebow (14 starts)


Detroit Lions

Franchise QBs

1. Matthew Stafford -149 ('09-now)
2. Greg Landry - 95 ('68-'78)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - David Blough, 2 starts (Matthew Stafford is injured)

Near Misses

1. Eric Hipple - 61 ('80-'86, '89)
2. Scott Mitchell - 57 ('94-'98)
3. Joey Harrington - 55 ('02-'05)
4. Gary Danielson - 54 ('77-'78, '80-'82, '84)
5. Rodney Peete - 47 ('89-'93)
6. Charlie Batch - 46 ('98-'01)

36 total QBs


Green Bay Packers

Franchise QBs

1. Brett Favre - 253 ('92-'07)
2. Aaron Rodgers - 171 ('08-now)
3. Lynn Dickey - 101 ('76-'77, '79-'85)

Champion QBs - Bart Starr 1967 & 1968, Brett Favre 1997, Aaron Rodgers 2011

Current QB - Aaron Rodgers

Near Misses

1. Dan Majkowski - 49 ('87-'91)
2. Bart Starr - 46 ('67-'71) easily eclipses 64 if pre-1967 starts are considered

26 total QBs


Houston Texans

 Franchise QBs

1. Matt Schaub - 88 ('07-'13)
2. David Carr - 75 ('02-'06)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - DeShaun Watson, 35 starts

Near Misses - None.

15 total QBs, franchise started in 2002.


Indianapolis Colts (aka Baltimore Colts)

Franchise QBs

1. Peyton Manning - 208 ('98-'10)
2. Bert Jones - 92 ('73-'81)
3. Andrew Luck - 86 ('12-'16, '18)

Champion QBs - Johnny Unitas 1971, Peyton Manning 2007

Current QB - Jacoby Brissett, 27 starts

Near Misses

1. Johnny Unitas - 49 ('67, '69-'72) had pre-1967 starts
2. Jeff George - 49 ('94-'97)
3. Mike Pagel - 47 ('82-'85)
4. Jack Trudeau - 47 ('86-'90, '92-'93)
5. Jim Harbaugh - 46 ('94-'97)

 35 total QBs


Jacksonville Jaguars

Franchise QBs

1. Mark Brunell - 117 ('95-'03)
2. David Garrard - 76 ('02, '04-'10)
3. Blake Bortles - 73 ('13-'18)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Gardner Minshew, 9 starts

Near Misses

1. Byron Leftwich - 44 ('03-'06)

 19 total QBs, franchise started in 2005.


Kansas City Chiefs

Franchise QBs

1. Len Dawson - 90 ('67-'75) had pre-1967 starts
2. Trent Green - 88 ('01-'06)
3. Bill Kenney - 77 ('80-'88)
4. Alex Smith - 77 ('13-'17)
5. Mike Livingston - 76 ('69-'79)

Champion QBs - Len Dawson 1967

Current QB - Patrick Mahomes, 28 starts

Near Misses

1. Elvis Grbac - 47 ('97-'99)
2. Matt Cassel - 47 ('09-'12)
3. Steve DeBerg - 41 ('89-'91)

33 total QBs


Los Angeles Chargers (aka San Diego Chargers)

Franchise QBs

1. Philip Rivers - 221 ('06-now)
2. Dan Fouts - 171 ('73-'87)
3. John Hadl - 78 ('67-'72) had pre-1967 starts
4. Stan Humphries - 68 ('92-'97)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Philip Rivers

Near Misses

1. Drew Brees - 58 ('02-'05)

 34 total QBs


Los Angeles Rams (aka St. Louis Rams)

Franchise QBs

1. Jim Everett - 105 ('86-'93)
2. Marc Bulger - 95 ('02-'09)
3. Roman Gabriel - 82 ('67-'72) had per-1967 starts

Champion QBs - Kurt Warner 2000

Current QB - Jared Goff, 51 starts

Near Misses

1. Pat Haden - 55 ('76-'81)
2. Jared Goff ('16-'19)
3. Kurt Warner - 50 ('99-'03)
4. Sam Bradford - 49 ('10-'13)
5. Vince Ferragamo - 43 ('79, '81-'84)
6. Tony Banks - 43 ('96-'98)

42 total QBs


Miami Dolphins

Franchise QBs

1. Dan Marino - 230 ('83-'99)
2. Bob Griese - 151 ('67-'80) had pre-1967 starts
3. Ryan Tannehill - 88 ('12-'16, '18)

Champion QBs - Bob Griese 1973 & 1974

Current QB - Ryan Fitzpatrick, 10 starts

Near Misses

1. Jay Fiedler - 59 ('00-'04)
2. David Woodley - 40 ('80-'83)

34 total QBs


Minnesota Vikings

Franchise QBs

1. Tommy Kramer - 110 ('77, '79-'89)
2. Fran Tarkenton - 93 ('72-'78)
3. Daunte Culpepper - 80 ('00-'05)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Kirk Cousins, 29 starts

Near Misses

1. Wade Wilson - 48 ('83-'91)
2. Brad Johnson - 44 ('96-'97, '05-'06)

37 total QBs


New Orleans Saints

Franchise QBs

1. Drew Brees - 213 ('06-now)
2. Archie Manning - 129 ('71-'75, '77-'81)
3. Aaron Brooks - 82 ('00-'05)
4. Bobby Herbert - 78 ('86-'89, '91-'92)

Champion QBs - Drew Brees 2010

Current QB - Drew Brees

Near Misses

1. Jim Everett - 47 ('94-'96)
2. Billy Kilmer - 40 ('67-'70) had pre-1967 starts

32 total QBs


New England Patriots (aka Boston Patriots)

Franchise QBs

1. Tom Brady - 280 ('01-now)
2. Steve Grogan - 135 ('75-'90)
3. Drew Bledsoe - 123 ('93-'01)

Champion QBs - Tom Brady 2002, 2004, 2005, 2015, 2017, & 2019

Current QB - Tom Brady

Near Misses

1. Jim Plunkett - 61 ('71-'75)
2. Tony Eason - 49 ('83-'89)

25 total QBs


New York Giants

Franchise QBs

1. Eli Manning - 233 ('04-now)
2. Phil Simms - 160 ('79-'81, '84-'93)
3. Fran Tarkenton - 69 ('67-'71) had pre-1967 starts for Minnesota as well
4. Kerry Collins - 68 ('99-'03)

Champion QBs - Jeff Hostetler 1987, Phil Simms 1991, Eli Manning 2008 & 2012

Current QB - Eli Manning (Daniel Jones is injured)

Near Misses

1. Dave Brown - 53 ('94-'97)

23 total QBs


New York Jets

Franchise QBs

1. Ken O'Brien - 106 ('84-'92)
2. Joe Namath - 103 ('67-'76) had starts pre-1967
3. Richard Todd - 94 ('76-'83)

Champion QBs - Joe Namath 1970

Current QB - Sam Darnold, 24 starts

Near Misses

1. Mark Sanchez - 62 ('09-'12) guess "Sanchize" didn't end up being a good nickname
2. Vinny Testaverde - 61 ('98-'03, '05)
3. Chad Pennington - 61 ('02-'07)
4. Boomer Esiason - 42 ('93-'95)

38 total QBs


Oakland Raiders (aka Los Angeles Raiders)

Franchise QBs

1. Ken Stabler - 96 ('71-'79)
2. Derek Carr - 91 ('14-now)
3. Daryle Lamonica - 84 ('67-'73) had pre-1967 starts
4. Rich Gannon - 77 ('99-'04)

Champion QBs - Ken Stabler 1977, Jim Plunkett 1981 & 1984

Current QB - Derek Carr

Near Misses

1. Jim Plunkett - 57 ('80-'86)
2. Jay Schroeder - 57 ('88-'92)
3. Jeff Hostetler - 55 ('93-'96)
4. Marc Wilson - 50 ('81, '83-'87)

37 total QBs


Philadelphia Eagles

Franchise QBs

1. Donovan McNabb - 142 ('99-'09)
2. Ron Jaworski - 137 ('77-'86)
3. Randall Cunningham - 107 ('85-'95)

Champion QBs - Nick Foles 2018

Current QB - Carson Wentz, 53 starts

Near Misses

1. Carson Wentz ('16-'19)
2. Norm Snead - 51 ('67-'70) had pre-1967 starts
3. Michael Vick - 40 ('10-'13)

36 total QBs


Pittsburgh Steelers

Franchise QBs

1. Ben Roethlisberger - 216 ('05-now)
2. Terry Bradshaw - 158 ('70-'83)
3. Kordell Stewart - 76 ('97-'02)
4. Bubby Brister - 67 ('86, '88-'92)

Champion QBs - Terry Bradshaw 1975, 1976, 1979, & 1980, Ben Roethlisberger 2006 & 2009

Current QB - Devlin Hodges, 2 starts (Ben Roethlisberger is injured)

Near Misses

1. Neil O'Donnell - 61 ('91-'95)
2. Mark Malone - 45 ('81, '84-'87)

28 total QBs


Seattle Seahawks

Franchise QBs

1. Matt Hasselbeck - 131 ('01-'10)
2. Russell Wilson - 125 ('12-now)
3. Dave Krieg - 119 ('81-'91)
4. Jim Zorn - 100 ('76-'83) pre-1967 starts

Champion QBs - Russell Wilson 2014

Current QB - Russell Wilson

Near Misses

1. Rick Mirer - 51 ('93-'96)

22 total QBs


San Francisco 49ers

Franchise QBs

1. Joe Montana - 129 ('79-'90)
2. Steve Young - 124 ('87-'99)
3. Alex Smith - 75 ('05-'07, '09-'12)
4. John Brodie - 73 ('67-'73) had pre-1967 starts
5. Jeff Garcia - 71 ('99-'03)

Champion QBs - Joe Montana 1982, 1985, 1989 & 1990, Steve Young 1995

Current QB - Jimmy Garoppolo, 21 starts

Near Misses

1. Colin Kaepernick - 58 ('12-'16)

37 total QBs


Tampa Bay Buccaneers

Franchise QBs

1. Trent Dilfer - 76 ('94-'99)
2. Vinny Testaverde - 72 ('87-'92)
3. Doug Williams - 67 ('78-'82)
4. Jameis Winston - 67 ('15-now)

Champion QBs - Brad Johnson, 2003

Current QB - Jameis Winston

Near Misses

1. Josh Freeman - 59 ('09-'13)
2. Brad Johnson - 49 ('01-'04)

 37 total QBs, franchise started in 1976


Tennessee Titans (aka Houston Oilers, Tennessee Oilers)

Franchise QBs

1. Warren Moon - 139 ('84-'93)
2. Steve McNair - 131 ('95-'05)
3. Dan Pastorini - 107 ('71-'79)

Champion QBs - None.

Current QB - Ryan Tannehill, 7 starts

Near Misses

1. Marcus Mariota - 61 ('15-now)
2. Vince Young - 47 ('06-'10)

 38 total QBs


Washington Redskins

Franchise QBs

1. Joe Theismann - 124 ('76-'85)
2. Billy Kilmer - 74 ('71'-78)
3. Sonny Jurgenson - 67 ('67-'74) had pre-1967 starts
4. Mark Rypien - 66 ('89-'93)

Champion QBs - Joe Theismann 1983, Doug Williams 1988, Mark Rypien 1992

Current QB Dwayne Haskins, 7 starts (Alex Smith is injured)

Near Misses

1. Kirk Cousins - 58 ('12-'17)
2. Jason Campbell - 52 ('06-'09)
3. Gus Frerotte - 46 ('94-'98)

40 total QBs

Only 2 men have managed to be Franchise QBs for two different teams. Fran Tarkenton with the Vikings and the Eagles, and Alex Smith with the 49ers and Chiefs.

So there you go, each Franchise and their "Franchise" QBs. How about the other side of the spectrum? Journeyman is the common nomenclature used for the gun for hire types who bounce from team to team but always manage to get work. Since 1967, 18 QBs have started a game for 5 or more different teams. Bold indicates they achieved Franchise status.

The 5's

Wade Wilson - Vikings, Falcons, Saints, Cowboys, Raiders
Jim McMahon - Bears, Chargers, Eagles, Vikings, Cardinals,
David Krieg - Seahawks, Chiefs, Lions, Cardinals, Bears,
Trent Dilfer - Buccaneers, Ravens, Seahawks, Browns, 49ers
Jeff George - Colts, Falcons, Raiders, Vikings, Redskins
Jeff Garcia - 49ers, Browns, Lions, Eagles, Buccaneers
Kyle Orton -  Bears, Broncos, Chiefs, Cowboys, Bills
Matt Cassel - Patriots, Chiefs, Vikings, Cowboys, Titans
Case Keenum - Texans, Rams, Vikings, Broncos, Redskins

The 6's

Steve DeBerg - 49ers, Broncos, Buccaneers, Chiefs, Dolphins, Falcons
Vinny Testaverde - Buccaneers, Browns, Ravens, Jets, Cowboys, Panthers
Steve Beuerlein - Raiders, Cowboys, Cardinals, Jaguars, Panthers, Broncos
Kerry Collins - Panthers, Saints, Giants, Raiders, Titans, Colts
Josh McCown - Cardinals, Raiders, Bears, Buccaneers, Browns, Jets
Brian Hoyer - Cardinals, Browns, Texans, Bears, 49ers, Colts

The 7's

Chris Chandler - Colts, Buccaneers, Cardinals, Rams, Titans, Falcons, Bears
Gus Frerotte -  Redskins, Lions, Broncos, Bengals, Vikings, Dolphins, Rams

The Ultimate Journeyman

Ryan Fitzpatrick -  Rams, Bengals, Bills, Titans, Texans, Jets, Buccaneers, Dolphins

Film Director Title Belt: That's a Wrap

Some summary comments.

Belts

Since 1970, 19 different directors rose to the challenge and earned a Title Belt.

Six of those directors only managed to earn one Belt - Denis Villeneuve, JJ Abrams, Brad Bird, Ang Lee, David Fincher, and John Carpenter.

Six more only got two: Alfonso Cuarón, Quentin Tarantino, the Coen Brothers, Michael Mann, Robert Zemeckis, and George Lucas.

Three earned three - Peter Jackson, Stanley Kubrick, and Francis Ford Coppola.

James Cameron earned four.

Christopher Nolan and Martin Scorsese got five.

Steven Spielberg led all directors with eight.

Five decades meant five "Decade Belts" were awarded. They went to Francis Ford Coppola, Steven Spielberg twice, Peter Jackson, and Christopher Nolan.

Spielberg led all involved with 19 hits, Scorsese was next with 13 and Tim Burton was the only other director in the double digits with 10.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Money

Financially the top 10 (in non-adjusted, domestic gross) over the period studied were:

10. George Lucas ($1.744b)
9. David Yates ($1.789b)
8. Tim Burton ($1.839b)
7. Christopher Nolan ($1.867b)
6. James Cameron ($1.949b)
5. Robert Zemeckis ($2.096b)
4. Peter Jackson ($2.105b)
3. Ron Howard ($2.107b)
2. Michael Bay ($2.327b)
1. Stephen Spielberg ($4.552b)

All of those directors scored at least one hit with Michael Bay being the only one not to qualify for a Belt due to only having one hit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Awards

Ranking system - 1 point for a nomination, 2 points for a win (Razzies negative points)

Oscars

5. Stanley Kubrick: 13 noms, 1 win = 15pts

5. Alejandro Iñárritu: 7 noms, 4 wins = 15pts

3. Stephen Spielberg: 16 noms, 3 wins = 22pts

2. Francis Ford Coppola: 13 noms, 5 wins = 23pts

1. Coen Brothers: 16 noms, 4 wins = 24pts

*Alfonso Cuarón has 14pts with "Roma" a favorite to win at least one this year which would put him ahead of Kubrick & Iñárritu.

Globes

5. Alejandro Iñárritu: 4 noms, 2 wins = 8pts
5. Ang Lee: 4 noms, 2 wins = 8pts
4. Quentin Tarantino: 7 noms, 1 win = 9pts
3. Martin Scorsese: 9 noms, 2 wins = 13pts
2. Stephen Spielberg: 13 noms, 2 wins = 17pts
1. Francis Ford Coppola: 11 noms, 4 wins = 19pts

BAFTAs

5. Ang Lee: 10 noms, 3 wins = 16pts
5. Coen Brothers: 14 noms, 1 win = 16pts
4. Martin Scorsese: 12 noms, 3 wins = 18pts
4. Stephen Spielberg: 14 noms, 2 wins = 18pts
2. Peter Jackson: 11 noms, 4 wins = 19pts
1. Alfonso Cuarón: 15 noms, 3 wins = 21pts

Saturns

5. Bryan Singer: 8 noms, 2 wins = 12 pts
4. Christopher Nolan: 9 noms, 6 wins = 21pts
3. Peter Jackson: 14 noms, 4 wins = 22pts
2. Stephen Spielberg: 14 noms, 5 wins = 24pts
1. James Cameron: 12 wins, 8 noms = 28 pts

*Tarantino & del Toro both nominated for 9 without a win.

Cannes

5. Coen Brothers: 4 noms, 1 win = 6pts
4. Martin Scorsese: 5 noms, 2 wins = 9pts
3. Steven Soderbergh: 7 noms, 2 wins = 11pts
2. Francis Ford Coppola: 6 noms, 4 wins = 14pts
1. Alejandro Iñárritu: 7 noms, 4 wins = 15pts

Razzies

5. Roland Emmerich: 5 noms, 0 wins = -5pts
4. Brian De Palma = 6 noms, 0 wins = -6 pts
4. George Lucas: 4 noms, 1 win = -6pts
2. Michael Bay: 7 noms, 2 wins = -11pts
1. M Night Shyamalan: 9 noms, 4 wins = -17pts

I find it really unfortunate Shyamalan is treated this way. I think "Lady in the Water" and "The Village" are highly underrated and "Signs" is my favorite movie all-time. So now that I've destroyed my credibility we'll continue.

Total Awards

10. Quentin Tarantino: 29 noms, 4 wins, 0 R's = 37pts

9. Ang Lee: 23 noms, 8 wins, 0 R's = 39pts

8. Alejandro Iñárritu: 27 noms, 13 wins, 0 R's = 53pts

8. James Cameron: 27 noms, 13 wins, 0 R's = 53pts

6. Alfonso Cuarón*: 33 noms, 9 wins, 0 R's = 51pts

5. Coen Brothers: 39 noms, 7 wins, 0 R's = 54pts

4. Martin Scorsese: 40 noms, 8 wins, 0 R's = 56pts

3. Peter Jackson: 37 noms, 12 wins, 0 R's = 61pts

2. Francis Ford Coppola: 35 noms, 15 wins, 0 R's = 65pts

1. Stephen Spielberg: 59 noms, 13 wins, 0 R's = 85pts

*As noted before Cuarón likely to add to wins total at this coming Oscars ceremony, Coens also have a nominee, as well as Adam McKay although even a sweep of his three nominations would only give him 21 total points.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Honorable Mentions

The following directors were missed, neglected, or ignored during the "research" portion of this little project and might have contended for a Belt or at the very least have recorded at least a one-hit wonder. If you have any others in mind, suggest them or do your own analysis to see if they'd be Belt contenders.

Kathryn Bigelow - "The Hurt Locker" ('08), "Zero Dark Thirty" ('12)

Mike Newell - "Four Weddings and a Funeral" ('94), "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" ('05)

Richard Curtis - "Love Actually" ('03)

Patty Jenkins - "Monster" ('03), "Wonder Woman" ('17)

George Miller - "Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior" ('82), "Happy Feet" ('06), "Mad Max: Fury Road" ('15)

Woody Allen - "Annie Hall" ('77), "Interiors" ('78), "Broadway Danny Rose" ('85), "Hannah and Her Sisters" ('86), "Crimes and Misdemeanors" ('89), "Bullets Over Broadway" ('95), "Midnight in Paris" ('12)

Spike Lee - "She's Gotta Have It" ('86), "Do the Right Thing" ('90), "Jungle Fever" ('91), "Blackkklansman" ('18)

The following directors plied their craft before the time period I looked at, but likely would be Belt holders in the '30s, '40s, and '50s:

Alfred Hitchcock, John Huston, Frank Capra, Orson Welles, William Wyler, and others

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hope you enjoyed reading these as much as I enjoyed compiling them. To conclude matters, I'll make Oscar picks, although my track record in Award prognostication is notoriously horrible. So bet your house on these picks:


Best Picture - "Roma" Alfonso Cuarón

Lead Actor - Rami Malek "Bohemian Rhapsody"

Lead Actress - Lady Gaga "A Star Is Born"

Supporting Actor - Mahershala Ali "Green Book"

Supporting Actress - Regina King "If Beale Street Could Talk"

Director - Alfonso Cuarón "Roma"

Animated Feature - "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse" Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey, Rodney Rothman

Animated Short - No Clue

Adapted Screenplay - "The Ballad of Buster Scruggs" Coen Brothers

Original Screenplay - "First Reformed" Paul Schrader

Cinematography - "Roma" Alfonso Cuarón

Best Documentary Feature - No Clue

Best Documentary Short Subject - No Clue

Best Live Action Short Film - No Clue

Best Foreign Language Film - "Roma" Alfonso Cuarón

Film Editing - "Vice" Hank Corwin

Sound Editing - "Black Panther" Benjamin A Burtt, Steve Boeddekker

Sound Mixing - "A Star Is Born"

Production Design - "Black Panther" Hannah Beachler

Original Score - "Mary Poppins Returns" Marc Shaiman, Scott Wittman

Original Song - Shallow "A Star Is Born" Lady Gaga, Mark Ronson, Anthony Rossomando, Andrew Wyatt, Benjamin Rice

Makeup and Hair - "Vice"

Costume Design - "The Favourite" Sandy Powell

Visual Effects - "Avengers: Infinity War"